> With that in mind, when a mechanism that delays submissions from > non-subscribers is first employed, some number of people will "trip" > over it. They usually whine about it but once the rules are explained > to them they realize they do have a responsibility to pay attention to > how they use their email. If by "paying attention to how they use their email" you mean that the author should pick his From address on a per-message basis, so that he uses the subscription address for that list, I emphatically disagree. If nothing else this presumes that the author wants to see personal replies to the messages he sends to the list to go to the same mailbox as other traffic that comes from the list. This is not a reasonable assumption. I'm all for reducing the amount of spam on WG lists as long as the filters don't impair genuine contributions. But I'm fed up with WG lists that expect me to remove my shoes, kneel, bow in the direction of Mae West, and precisely utter some strange incantation, just so that I can get past that list admin's parochial idea of the responsible way to send mail. And I've seen too many cases where the purpose of these meaningless hoops seemed to be to exclude useful contributions from outsiders merely because they didn't know the secret handshake. Keith